Music (Audience Of)

I think also one of the most amazing things about music, especially
for the last twenty or thirty years, is the fact that we've been able to
preserve it on record. So it's no longer someone jamming in a little club in
the thirties in a little smoky place. It's an eternal process. you can listen
to people that have died maybe twenty years ago. You can see them on the
television. You can see them moving and young. They are no longer there. You've
captured that moment, purely through mechanical things, which is really quite
ironic because music is such a pure emotional thing to be captured on such a
mechanical modern contraption. but it's the only way we can do it. (1978, Self
Portrait) SHE THINKS, THEN, THAT HER MUSIC IS A THERAPY?

Oh, yes, it's very much a therapeutic thing, not only for me. That's
a really good word. It really is like a therapy. The message I would like
people to receive is that if they hear it and accept it, that's fantastic.

If they let it into their ears that is all I can ask for and if they
think about it afterwards or during it, that is even more fantastic. There are
so many writers and so many messages, to be chosen out of all of them is
something very special.

The messages? Things that maybe could help people, like observing
the where an emotional game is being played and maybe making people think about
it again.

It's very glamorous to make a statement like that, but how true did
she think it was?

It's easy to say everything. Really all I do when I write songs is
try and write something that affects me: something that I feel does have a
solution or something that is unexplored.

It really is just self-expression, and although I know that a lot of
people will just say it's a load of rubbish, I would like to think that there
is a message and maybe people will hear it. (1978, March, Melody Maker)

Would it upset you if you missed the mark and people totally
misread what you're about?

It's a lot, to expect people to sit down and read my lyrics, and I'd
be amazed if many people did. Not many people read poetry and it's a similar
effort. No, it doesn't worry me that much if they don't. That's what I'd like
them to do because that's why I do it.

But really, I think I've had enough response from people to make me
have done enough to fade away now. I've had much more of a chance than most
people to get through with a message. From some of the letters I get, it seems
that people have understood and it seems to have helped them a bit. That's all
I could wish for. (1978, July, Melody Maker)

How important is it for the listener to understand your intentions
while listening to one of your records?

It means a lot to me if people are interpreting the music in the way
that I originally wanted it to be done. But, I do feel that music is a bit like
a painting, in that when you buy a painting, it's because you like it. And what
is important is your interpretation of what it means. That's why it means so
much to you. I think that applies to records as well.

But, as long as people are getting enjoyment out of them, I don't
think it matters to me. It doesn't worry me if they don't understand the way
that I'd hoped they would. But of course it's always nice if they do. (1983,
Voc'l)

What
propels the serious music listener to plunk down the cash for one her albums
anyway?

If I could actually pin down the quality that enables me to keep
working and keep people enjoying it, I wouldn't worry very much. Whenever I
make an album I do everything I can to make sure, within the time allowed, is
that every song is as good as I possibly can make it. (C.1983, Kate Connection)

Do you
find that a lot of people don't quite understand your work, maybe think it's a
little bit mystical?

I think there's a lot of people who don't understand necessarily
what I'd originally conceived as the idea, but I don't know if that's very
important. I think if people feel they understand it on any level, then I've
achieved something and that's great. (1985, Rock Over London)

Well, are people clued in enough to pick up on all these sort of
subtleties and allusions in your songs, generally, and to know what they mean?
When you talk with people, by and large do they show a good understanding of
the concepts?

You know, I think that the majority of the people really do. Yes, I
really think they do. Because, if they bother to listen, then after about three
or four times they start putting the words or the ideas together. And I mean
the one that really amazed me, we did a video of `` Breathing'' and the idea
was being in this huge inflatable; and I was at this conference somewhere and
there were all these women in their forties and fifties, real Monty Python sort
of women, and they all came up and said [Kate affects a strong london
accent, which requires merely an exaggeration of her normal accent]: ``Oh,
we loved your video!'' And then one of them says: ``But listen,
you must tell me, I had this, you know, this argument with my daughter; you
were meant to be in a womb, weren't you? I mean, that
is what it was meant to be wasn't it? A womb?'' And I said
yeah!

You mean she got it, it was true?

Yeah, she got it! And she said: ``There you are, didn't I tell you
it was a womb.'' And I thought yeah, that's fantastic! I mean, I wouldn't have
even expected her to sit and watch it...

But kate, I'd like to pick an argument with you. I must confess, I
find it difficult to watch your performances, I think for a few
reasons. It seems to me so much of your music flows right out from essence, so
to speak, whereas all the acting, all the theatrics, by their very nature
they're something artificial and contrived. Also, because there's often a more
or less flagrant sexual element to your performance, the viewer is
automatically thrust into the position of being a voyeur, and being a voyeur is
not necessarily everyone's cup of tea. You know what I mean?

Wow, yeah, that's h-e-a-v-y. But I have only ever consciously
projected the sexual element in a couple of characters, and if that's present
for you in every performance, well, that is worrying for me, as it's not
intentional and I'm not aware of it.

Well, be that as it may, I know just how seriously you've taken the
art of performance, how you studied under lindsay kemp and all that. And I'm
also aware how much effort and skill it takes; To act like that is not
something just anybody could get up and do. Now I'm not sure to what extent my
own perception is idiosyncratic, I mean to say, I do know people who
love your performances. But, myself, I wonder - and here's where
I'm trying to pick the argument - if all these theatrics might not detract from
your potential for being taken seriously as a musician, especially in america.

It's a big problem. Because I don't think I've been completely happy
with any visual performance that I've done except for `` Army Dreamers'' and
perhaps `` Running Up That Hill.'' But they were videos which took a lot of
time and work and control. Except for one I did recently of `` Running Up That
Hill'' for a British TV show, where I look a bit like Richard III, there are no
TV performances I've done where I think I've ever even got close to pulling it
off. So, apart from those few things, but also the videos of `` Wuthering
Heights'' and bits of `` Breathing,'' I don't think I've accomplished what I
really wanted visually. Usually the problems are lack of time or money. We
always have a lot of challenging ideas but then end up compromising somewhere
or other in order to meet deadlines or budgets. But occasionally things
do come together well. If anything, though, I think my
performances help audiences understand the music better, especially the lyrical
aspect, and the tour of Europe definitely caused a change in attitude both
among the public and the media. Many people began to take me seriously as a
musician for the first time. The audiences could see me there singing and
dancing, leading the band and in control of the whole act. And that's quite
different from the kind of controlled, far-away image that one gets through the
media...

But in these performances, kate - and really they are what I wanted
to talk about, not your videos - there are only a couple of songs which you
yourself perform on the piano, usually one or two of the more
gentle and intimate ones like `` the man with the child in his eyes.'' yet
someone like me, at any rate, would like to see you as a performer, as a
serious musician, singing at the piano and leading the band, which I know you
could do very well if you wanted to. I told you earlier how the first time I
saw kate bush was early on, around 1978, when you did two or three numbers in
that manner on a tv show, and it was then that I recognized in an instant, that
this young kid was an exceptional artist who had to be taken very seriously, I
mean musically. am I right in thinking that one of the reasons
you've never toured in the states is because you suppose you need this big show
with all the people involved and all the expensive props? Do you not feel - and
I suppose this is really what my argument comes down to - that you could come
to america just with your band and play more or less straightforwardly?

I'd be able to feel that I had any effort or sense of challenge left
in me. I don't really feel that happy doing something, in a way, unless I've
really pushed myself to the limit. And, you know, it's like when we do videos
and things, I don't really feel right unless we're all filthy and exhausted by
the end of the day. Otherwise it doesn't feel like you've put enough effort
into it. When you hear an album you listen to the music; but when you go and
see a show, you're going there to see that person or the band come
alive, and hopefully give you everything that they've got, so that you can
really have a good evening and enjoy the music within the concept of a
show. And I think, if I was just going to stand up there, then,
you know, what are the audience getting apart from seeing me just standing
there that they can't get on an album? On the albums, they get much better
arrangements, much better vocals which are in tune, all that sort of thing...
(1985, Musician)

Do a lot of your fans actually write and ask you about the meanings
of your songs?

Um...No, I think most of them don't have to. I think they actually
understand it, or if they don't, they still feel it and understand it; and
that's really what it's all about. But I do get a lot of feedback from them and
it's very important to me, and it's very interesting, as well, just to hear
what strikes them, what they like. (1985, Homeground)

Do you think it's important that people know what the songs are
about?

No, I think it can be interesting for people, but their
interpretation is what matters, and I find it fascinating how people do seem to
understand so much about a song that must be totally obscure and is so personal
to me, but maybe they just feel it, they feel the emotions of the
song, somehow grasp the meanings. It's so hard for me to tell because I know
what it's about, but for example, some of the stuff on The Ninth
Wave are so obscure lyrically, and yet people seem to know exactly what
I'm trying to say. That's a great feeling. It stops me worrying about that
aspect of songwriting - that someone somewhere knows exactly what you're trying
to put into words. (1987, KBC
21)

Do you have favourite lyric-writers, as opposed to ``musical''
songwriters?

I'm not sure you can separate the two, because once a word is sung,
it can completely change its feeling to the point where you don't recognise the
word any more - for me that is part of the fascination. But my favourite lyric
just now is ``The Boy in the Bubble'' by Paul Simon. The chorus of that is
totally brilliant, particularly the line, ``The way we look to the distant
constellation that is dying in the corner of the sky.'' It's poetry, but the
impact is the combination of the words with the music, and the way he sings it
- it's so good. But quite often I mishear lyrics, and prefer my
version to the real words when I find them out. I know a lot of people who have
the same experience, and again we're back to what music means to the listener,
or how they hear it. Music is a very special thing. (1987, KBC 21)

My music can be a little obscure. It does worry me that the music
might be too complicated for people to take in - that they have to work too
hard at it. (1990, Los Angeles
Times)

When people listen to your record, that's an audio
experience; you don't necessarily want to see things. Like when you write a
song: the person singing the song is a character. Although it might be you
vocally, it's not yourself you are singing about, but that character. It's
someone who is in a situation, so you treat it like a
film. That's how I see songs. They are just
like a little story: you are in a situation, you are this
character. This is what happens. End. That's what human beings want
desperately. We all love being read stories. And none of us get it anymore.
'Cause there's a television now instead. (1990, Musician)

It's impossible for me to know how other people hear my music. I
think the wonderful thing about art is that it's all down to the receiver as to
whether they like it or not, what they see in it, how they feel about it. It's
a totally personal relationship between that piece of work and that person and
a really special thing. I just continually think how extraordinary it is,
really, that people do want to hear my stuff, especially when I take so long to
make records, you know. (1989, Music
Express)

How important is it to you that the person listening to your record
understands what's going through your mind? Or do you mind if they have their
own interpretations?

I think it's wonderful if they have their own interpretations. I
think that's really important, although it matters to me that the lyrics are
saying something, and I spend a lot of time on lyrics. They're very difficult.
I think a lot of the power of lyrics is the sounds. The whole thing is just a
combination of sounds and textures, and definitely different words have a
different feeling that go with them. The way consonants mark things. It's a
very percussive instrument, in a way, words. And I think that's what's very
important, that they feel and sound right. (1989, Greater London)

There are so many musical cliches, and you're breaking them down.
Using davey spillane's uillean pipes and dave gilmour's guitar and the trio,
you've succeeded in creating a new, uncategorisable sort of music which isn't
anything, it's just music. I think that's important, because it makes people
open their ears to stuff. It enriches their lives.

It's like what you were saying about relationships - you've done it
with music. You've given it time to grow, to see if it's compatible. And it
sounds natural, not cosmetic.

Well, I think that's fantastic... that's just such a nice thing to
say, that's really great...wonderful, absolutely wonderful. Because I think
this is really what music is - a continual process of people experimenting,
taking this and that and putting them together: all these experimental
marriages. And when they work, I think that's such an important step, because
then they've created a new music of a sort which then goes on to evolve.

And, if it doesn't work, that's absolutely fine, too, because that
shows you what doesn't work. So, if you feel this is a natural union, that's
really good. I suppose I'd like to think that, as long as I really care about
making music, there will always be people out there who want to hear music that
is cared for. (1989, Melody
Maker)